Indian Removal Policy
In the early 19th century, white settlers faced what a problem during their quest to expand westward. This area was home to several strong Indian nations. The white settlers were not happy about these tribes standing in their way, so they pressured the federal government for help, which led to the Indian Removal Policy. This policy was the government’s twisted and selfish way of gaining land that they wouldn’t have to share. Andrew Jackson played a major role in this time period and was a “forceful proponent of Indian removal (Indian).” From 1814 to 1824, Jackson was instrumental in negotiating nine out of eleven treaties which took the eastern lands from the Indians in exchange for lands in the west. The tribes agreed …show more content…
He gave no respect to the Indians whatsoever. Jackson proposed to his fellow Americans that removal would save Indian people from the depredations of whites, and would resettle them in an area where they could govern themselves in peace, but some saw the truth-- an excuse for a brutal and inhumane course of action, and these people protested loudly against the removal. Sadly, their protests did not save the Indians from removal. The Choctaws were the first to sign a removal treaty. Some chose to stay in Mississippi under the terms of the Removal Act, yet most still ended up selling their land and moving west because of mistreatment from the whites. The Seminoles refused to leave, which lead to two more wars, killing many Indians and whites. The Creeks also refused to emigrate. They signed a treaty in March, 1832, which opened a large portion of their land to white settlement, but guaranteed them protected ownership of the remaining portion. The government failed to protect them from speculators, however, who quickly “cheated them out of their lands,” and the Creeks began stealing livestock and crops from white settlers. Some eventually committed arson and murder in retaliation for their brutal treatment. Secretary of War ordered the removal of the Creeks as a military necessity, never signing a removal treaty. The Cherokee, on the other hand, were tricked with an illegitimate treaty. Several thousand Cherokee protested, however the Supreme Court ignored their demands and ratified the treaty. The Cherokee were given two years to migrate voluntarily, at the end of which time they would be “forcibly removed.” 16,000 remained on their land at the end of the two years and the government sent in troops, who forced the Cherokees into stockades at bayonet point. They were not allowed time to gather their belongings, and as they left, whites looted their homes.
In the early 19th century, white settlers faced what a problem during their quest to expand westward. This area was home to several strong Indian nations. The white settlers were not happy about these tribes standing in their way, so they pressured the federal government for help, which led to the Indian Removal Policy. This policy was the government’s twisted and selfish way of gaining land that they wouldn’t have to share. Andrew Jackson played a major role in this time period and was a “forceful proponent of Indian removal (Indian).” From 1814 to 1824, Jackson was instrumental in negotiating nine out of eleven treaties which took the eastern lands from the Indians in exchange for lands in the west. The tribes agreed …show more content…
He gave no respect to the Indians whatsoever. Jackson proposed to his fellow Americans that removal would save Indian people from the depredations of whites, and would resettle them in an area where they could govern themselves in peace, but some saw the truth-- an excuse for a brutal and inhumane course of action, and these people protested loudly against the removal. Sadly, their protests did not save the Indians from removal. The Choctaws were the first to sign a removal treaty. Some chose to stay in Mississippi under the terms of the Removal Act, yet most still ended up selling their land and moving west because of mistreatment from the whites. The Seminoles refused to leave, which lead to two more wars, killing many Indians and whites. The Creeks also refused to emigrate. They signed a treaty in March, 1832, which opened a large portion of their land to white settlement, but guaranteed them protected ownership of the remaining portion. The government failed to protect them from speculators, however, who quickly “cheated them out of their lands,” and the Creeks began stealing livestock and crops from white settlers. Some eventually committed arson and murder in retaliation for their brutal treatment. Secretary of War ordered the removal of the Creeks as a military necessity, never signing a removal treaty. The Cherokee, on the other hand, were tricked with an illegitimate treaty. Several thousand Cherokee protested, however the Supreme Court ignored their demands and ratified the treaty. The Cherokee were given two years to migrate voluntarily, at the end of which time they would be “forcibly removed.” 16,000 remained on their land at the end of the two years and the government sent in troops, who forced the Cherokees into stockades at bayonet point. They were not allowed time to gather their belongings, and as they left, whites looted their homes.